Paper · 1976 · Journal of Economic Entomology

Controlling Pink Bollworms: Effects of Chemical Termination of Cotton Fruiting on Populations of Diapausing Larvae123

L. A. Bariola; D. L. Kittock; H. F. Arle; et al.

7
claims
15
verbatim quotes
12
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Applications of plant growth regulators in late August effectively terminated the fruiting of cotton and significantly reduced populations of diapausing larvae of Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders) (by 90% or more) in Arizona during 1972–74. As a result, fewer overwintered moths (39%) emerged the following spring from terminated plots. Applications in mid-, or late August were more effective than applications in early September. Yields were not significantly reduced by most treatments. The most effective materials tested were 2.4-D (amine salt of 2,4-dichlorophelloxy) acetic acid + chlorflurenol (methyl 2-chloro-9-hydroxyfluorene-9-carboxylate) and 2, 4-D + chlormequat ((2-chloroethyl) trimethylammonium chloride).

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Late August growth regulators terminated cotton fruiting.

Treatment
plant growth regulatorse0
Outcome
fruitinge0
Direction
terminatede0
Qualifier
late Auguste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Applications of plant growth regulators in late August effectively terminated the fruiting of cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Late August growth regulators reduced diapausing pink bollworm larvae by at least 90%.

Treatment
plant growth regulatorse1
Interactor
Pectinophora gossypiellaPectinophora gossypiellae0pest
Outcome
populations of diapausing larvae of Pectinophora gossypiellae0
Direction
reducede0
Value
90% or moree0
Setting
Arizonae0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pectinophora gossypiella
Pectinophora gossypiella · InteractorAlbertonatureza · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significantly reduced populations of diapausing larvae of Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders) (by 90% or more) in Arizona during 1972–74”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 105–241 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑
e1

“Applications of plant growth regulators in late August”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Terminated plots produced fewer overwintered moths the next spring, 39%.

Treatment
terminated plotse0
Interactor
Pink BollwormsPectinophora gossypiellat1pestt0
Outcome
overwintered mothse0
Direction
fewere0
Value
39%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Pectinophora gossypiella
Pectinophora gossypiella · InteractorAlbertonatureza · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fewer overwintered moths (39%) emerged the following spring from terminated plots.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 256–338 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑
t1

“Pink Bollworms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mid- or late-August applications were more effective than early-September applications.

Treatment
Applications in mid-, or late Auguste0
Outcome
more effectivee0
Direction
more effectivee0
Comparator
applications in early Septembere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Applications in mid-, or late August were more effective than applications in early September.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 339–433 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Most treatments did not significantly reduce cotton yields.

Treatment
most treatmentse0
Outcome
Yieldse0
Direction
not significantly reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yields were not significantly reduced by most treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–491 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2.4-D plus chlorflurenol was among the most effective materials.

Treatment
2.4-D (amine salt of 2,4-dichlorophelloxy) acetic acid + chlorflurenole0
Outcome
most effectivee0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The most effective materials tested were 2.4-D (amine salt of 2,4-dichlorophelloxy) acetic acid + chlorflurenol (methyl 2-chloro-9-hydroxyfluorene-9-carboxylate) and 2, 4-D + chlormequat ((2-chloroethyl) trimethylammonium chloride).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 492–724 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2, 4-D plus chlormequat was among the most effective materials.

Treatment
2, 4-D + chlormequate0
Outcome
most effectivee0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The most effective materials tested were 2.4-D (amine salt of 2,4-dichlorophelloxy) acetic acid + chlorflurenol (methyl 2-chloro-9-hydroxyfluorene-9-carboxylate) and 2, 4-D + chlormequat ((2-chloroethyl) trimethylammonium chloride).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 492–724 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 63–69 · show in text ↑

class · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 3 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.